David L Hicks | Reformed Episcopal Seminary (original) (raw)

Uploads

Thesis Chapters by David L Hicks

Throughout Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, there are certain references to the death of Jesus Ch... more Throughout Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, there are certain references to the death of Jesus Christ as an act beneficial to those who are “of faith” or “in Christ” (2:19-21; 3:1, 13-14; 5:11-12, 24-26; 6:12, 14, 17); however, the scholarly community has debated over the extent to which Paul’s theology connects the benefit of Christ’s death to the sacrificial cult of the Old Testament Law. While Paul does not explicitly make this connection in his letter to the Galatians, the absence of explicit reference to Christ’s death as an atoning sacrifice need not be taken as evidence of Paul’s disinterest in the subject matter or his rejection of the same. Rather, one may account for the silence by recognizing his perception of the common ground shared with his audience, regarding some aspects of the death of Christ. Because of the rhetorical nature of the letter to the Galatians, it is expected that Paul’s argumentation will be explicit where he perceives a disagreement over the significance of Christ’s death and less explicit where he believes there is agreement. Through literary critical methods, one may construct a profile of the “implied reader’s” understanding of the death of Christ which identifies Paul’s assumption that Christ’s death was an atoning sacrifice, bringing an end to the sacrificial cult of the Law, and the expectation that the reader accepts the same assumption. This is a view that is consistent with what Paul says elsewhere in his writings about the death of Christ, and it is also consistent with the tradition of the death of Jesus in the rest of the New Testament writings.

Drafts by David L Hicks

This paper addresses the issue of the use of the term "regenerate" in the baptismal service, and ... more This paper addresses the issue of the use of the term "regenerate" in the baptismal service, and originally was submitted to the Prayer Book Task Force of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) in 2012, during the ACNA's prayer book revision process. Because this issue has held a prominent place in the history of the Reformed Episcopal Church (a founding member of the Anglican Church in North America in 2009) from its earliest days until the last revision of its prayer book in 2003, it was appropriate to provide a summary of the REC‟s experience with its baptismal liturgy and the reasons for the most recent revision of the REC liturgy in which the word “regeneration” is restored.

This Prayer of Humble Access has been a part of the Anglican liturgical tradition from the time o... more This Prayer of Humble Access has been a part of the Anglican liturgical tradition from the time of the first Book of Common Prayer (1549), up to and including the current revisions and iterations. Of particular concern in this paper is the statement in the second half of the prayer, which recalls our Lord’s teaching as found in Saint John 6:53-56: “Grant us, therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of your dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us.” Such an assertion leads one to ask about the definition of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist and the understanding of the definition required of the participant. In other words, to what extent does a communicant need to articulate a particular propositional understanding of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, in order to be in communion with the church?

Authorial Intent and Biblical Meaning: the 'Husband of One Wife' Requirement in 1 Timothy 3:2 as a Test Case , 2003

The notion of “what the author meant,” or more simply authorial intent, plays a crucial role in a... more The notion of “what the author meant,” or more simply authorial intent, plays a crucial role in all discussions that look to the Bible for moral guidance. More often than not, the participants in these discussions argue their case in such a way that assumes their interpretive work is done once they have ascertained to their satisfaction what Paul or Matthew, for example, has said in a specific verse. However, what the interpreter has done in many instances is to take what seems to be the most natural reading of the text, i.e. that which makes the most sense in the reader’s own cultural context, and project that reading into the author’s intent. The underlying assumption is that the applicable moral authority of a given text is indistinguishable from the intention of the author. Hence, there is pressure upon the biblical interpreter, whether conscious or unconscious, to hear Paul or Matthew himself say what is meaningful in an interpreter’s own historical and cultural context.
In an effort to illustrate this issue more carefully, and to suggest an approach that may be helpful in resolving the aforementioned conundrum, this paper will examine the work of two biblical interpreters, representing two very different cultural and historical perspectives. In particular, we will examine their interpretations of Paul’s requirement stated in 1 Timothy 3:2 that a bishop/overseer must be “the husband of one wife

Throughout Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, there are certain references to the death of Jesus Ch... more Throughout Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, there are certain references to the death of Jesus Christ as an act beneficial to those who are “of faith” or “in Christ” (2:19-21; 3:1, 13-14; 5:11-12, 24-26; 6:12, 14, 17); however, the scholarly community has debated over the extent to which Paul’s theology connects the benefit of Christ’s death to the sacrificial cult of the Old Testament Law. While Paul does not explicitly make this connection in his letter to the Galatians, the absence of explicit reference to Christ’s death as an atoning sacrifice need not be taken as evidence of Paul’s disinterest in the subject matter or his rejection of the same. Rather, one may account for the silence by recognizing his perception of the common ground shared with his audience, regarding some aspects of the death of Christ. Because of the rhetorical nature of the letter to the Galatians, it is expected that Paul’s argumentation will be explicit where he perceives a disagreement over the significance of Christ’s death and less explicit where he believes there is agreement. Through literary critical methods, one may construct a profile of the “implied reader’s” understanding of the death of Christ which identifies Paul’s assumption that Christ’s death was an atoning sacrifice, bringing an end to the sacrificial cult of the Law, and the expectation that the reader accepts the same assumption. This is a view that is consistent with what Paul says elsewhere in his writings about the death of Christ, and it is also consistent with the tradition of the death of Jesus in the rest of the New Testament writings.

This paper addresses the issue of the use of the term "regenerate" in the baptismal service, and ... more This paper addresses the issue of the use of the term "regenerate" in the baptismal service, and originally was submitted to the Prayer Book Task Force of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) in 2012, during the ACNA's prayer book revision process. Because this issue has held a prominent place in the history of the Reformed Episcopal Church (a founding member of the Anglican Church in North America in 2009) from its earliest days until the last revision of its prayer book in 2003, it was appropriate to provide a summary of the REC‟s experience with its baptismal liturgy and the reasons for the most recent revision of the REC liturgy in which the word “regeneration” is restored.

This Prayer of Humble Access has been a part of the Anglican liturgical tradition from the time o... more This Prayer of Humble Access has been a part of the Anglican liturgical tradition from the time of the first Book of Common Prayer (1549), up to and including the current revisions and iterations. Of particular concern in this paper is the statement in the second half of the prayer, which recalls our Lord’s teaching as found in Saint John 6:53-56: “Grant us, therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of your dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us.” Such an assertion leads one to ask about the definition of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist and the understanding of the definition required of the participant. In other words, to what extent does a communicant need to articulate a particular propositional understanding of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, in order to be in communion with the church?

Authorial Intent and Biblical Meaning: the 'Husband of One Wife' Requirement in 1 Timothy 3:2 as a Test Case , 2003

The notion of “what the author meant,” or more simply authorial intent, plays a crucial role in a... more The notion of “what the author meant,” or more simply authorial intent, plays a crucial role in all discussions that look to the Bible for moral guidance. More often than not, the participants in these discussions argue their case in such a way that assumes their interpretive work is done once they have ascertained to their satisfaction what Paul or Matthew, for example, has said in a specific verse. However, what the interpreter has done in many instances is to take what seems to be the most natural reading of the text, i.e. that which makes the most sense in the reader’s own cultural context, and project that reading into the author’s intent. The underlying assumption is that the applicable moral authority of a given text is indistinguishable from the intention of the author. Hence, there is pressure upon the biblical interpreter, whether conscious or unconscious, to hear Paul or Matthew himself say what is meaningful in an interpreter’s own historical and cultural context.
In an effort to illustrate this issue more carefully, and to suggest an approach that may be helpful in resolving the aforementioned conundrum, this paper will examine the work of two biblical interpreters, representing two very different cultural and historical perspectives. In particular, we will examine their interpretations of Paul’s requirement stated in 1 Timothy 3:2 that a bishop/overseer must be “the husband of one wife